[Frameworks] Digitizing Super 8 at proper resolution

[Aaron F. Ross]

Jeff is absolutely right, there's no reason to capture footage at 
anything other than the maximum affordable resolution and color depth. ---

Consider this: everything looks better in the future. Literally. With 
vastly better technology available today, old footage looks better 
than on the day it was developed. All analog-to-digital transfers 
should be made at the best possible quality, in order to future-proof 
the material as much as possible. ---

And, of course, the larger the image is projected, the more obvious 
any sampling errors will be. ---

Aaron






At 12/27/2011, you wrote:
>There is a common belief -- which, like a lot of common wisdom 
>should be looked at skeptically -- that small format film lacks 
>enough useful "information" to require scanning at resolutions 
>greater than pillarboxed HD (1080 x 1440) or cropped HD (1080 x 
>1920).  Some feel that for Super-8 and 8mm, NTSC, PAL, and 720P are, 
>in the words of an engineer I know, "good enough."
>
>But I don't think anyone really tested this properly -- they just 
>said what seemed logical enough to them.  It's fine to say "that 
>looks pretty good at 1080 x 1440" but those who say this probably 
>did not try scanning the same film at higher resolutions to see if 
>there was an appreciable difference.
>
>I did some simple tests, and honestly was quite surprised at the 
>results.  Even when the final release format is HD or less, the 
>advantages of high resolution scans are obvious.
>
>I put together a little PDF you can download, with both Super-8 and 
>grainy 16mm samples scanned at different resolutions.  It was 
>written in response to a report by the Swiss group Memoriav, which 
>was doing tests of small format (for them this includes 16mm) scanning.
>
>Here's a link:
>
><http://db.tt/iriz5nyY>http://db.tt/iriz5nyY
>
>Here are links to full-res TIFFs of the files used -- zoom in on 
>them and see what you are losing with lower resolution scans.  Note 
>that the files are mostly over 20MB each, so don't try this on your cell phone.
>
><http://db.tt/8cw0YUXU>http://db.tt/8cw0YUXU
>
>http://db.tt/xizfMgLq
>
><http://db.tt/VvwuPSog>http://db.tt/VvwuPSog
>
>http://db.tt/LR0Phcy2
>
><http://db.tt/BofN5ls8>http://db.tt/BofN5ls8
>
>http://db.tt/aPXrsxAf
>
><http://db.tt/JSC7Vf2C>http://db.tt/JSC7Vf2C
>
>http://db.tt/SGYbJiWb
>
><http://db.tt/X1flduqJ>http://db.tt/X1flduqJ
>
>Let me know what you think.
>
>Jeff Kreines
>
>
>On Dec 23, 2011, at 2:22 PM, Ken Paul Rosenthal wrote:
>
>>Kevin,
>>
>>For future reference, if you simply digitize your super 8 upfront 
>>at:  Pro Rez 422 HQ 1080p, 1920x1080, 23.98 fps,
>>you'll be entirely up to spec and not need to do any converting for 
>>your timeline. Furthermore, digitizing to a
>>compressed file will allow you to easily edit without freezing up 
>>your system. As for projection quality, I've been
>>on the road for a year a half with Crooked Beauty--which was 
>>transferred on the above specs--and have seen
>>it projected on a the best (and worst) systems, the former in a 
>>huge theater on a commercial sized screen
>>and it looked stunning. I spent 3 months researching tech options, 
>>and the consensus from all the folks I consulted
>>with was that uncompressed is overkill for super 8 because the 
>>frame size only contains so much 'information'.
>>So spend the money upfront during the transfer (I highly recommend 
>>sitting in with owner/operator Phil Vigeant at
>>Pro 8) and it will be smooth sailing down the line.
>>
>>Ken
>><http://www.crookedbeautythefilm.com>www.crookedbeautythefilm.com  (Academic)
>><http://www.crookedbeauty.com>www.crookedbeauty.com  (Public)
>><http://www.kenpaulrosenthal.com>www.kenpaulrosenthal.com
>>_______________________________________________
>>FrameWorks mailing list
>><mailto:FrameWorks at jonasmekasfilms.com>FrameWorks at jonasmekasfilms.com
>>https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
>
>_______________________________________________ FrameWorks mailing 
>list FrameWorks at jonasmekasfilms.com 
>https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks

-------------------------------------------

Aaron F. Ross
Digital Arts Guild